RuneQuest 6

[Fonso]

I don't think that make a new ruleset and divide more the market would be a good idea. I would rather not have to buy another ruleset more, especially if it's very similar to MRQ2.

Personally, I'd like more if they use Leyend's system. If they want change or fix something, they only have to write the changes that they want to do and put it online. Or make an Option's Guide with them for Legend with those changes and other rules only good in specific campaigns, like a ship combat rules, heroquests for Glorantha, general PG, etc.

That way, everyone wins.

 

[medievaladventures]

Since Runequest 6 won't be OGL, I'm even more hoping that Mongoose goes ahead with Legend and makes it OGL. Yes, I know Runequest 6 will have a license, but the Gateway license isn't as open as the OGL in my opinion. So please Mongoose, make Legend happen and make it OGL.

 

[Ultor]

Since Runequest 6 won't be OGL, I'm even more hoping that Mongoose goes ahead with Legend and makes it OGL. Yes, I know Runequest 6 will have a license, but the Gateway license isn't as open as the OGL in my opinion. So please Mongoose, make Legend happen and make it OGL.

Legend isn't going to be OGL (which was actually quite restrictive) - it's going to be a really simple license, by all accounts. This bodes well, and I hope the RQ6 license learns from the Heroquest Gateway license and makes it a bit more open.

The sooner details about these come out, the better. Then we can all get on with designing and sharing stuff without having to worry about what legal toes we're stepping on.

 

[medievaladventures]

To my knowledge, Mongoose hasn't decided what their license will be, so it might be OGL. There are lots of ways that they could go, public domain, creative commons, OGL, something else. I'd love to see it done as a Creative Commons license, perhaps CC BY-SA but I don't see that happening. The bonus about the OGL license is that a lot of gaming material has been released under the OGL that you can mix and match with to make a lot of cool things.

 

[Newtus]

I hope the RQ6 license learns from the Heroquest Gateway license and makes it a bit more open.

Just out of interest how could the HQ Gateway in your opinion made any better by making it a bit more open. Not being snarky here just intrigued?

 

[Philotomy]

I don't think that make a new ruleset and divide more the market would be a good idea.

I think the market will rule on that question.

I would rather not have to buy another ruleset more, especially if it's very similar to MRQ2.

Then don't buy it; you won't be forced to.

While I don't think I *need* another set of RQ rules, I'd be lying if I said I won't take a look at RQ6. I have a high regard for the authors' work.

 

[medievaladventures]

I hope the RQ6 license learns from the Heroquest Gateway license and makes it a bit more open.

Just out of interest how could the HQ Gateway in your opinion made any better by making it a bit more open. Not being snarky here just intrigued?

I'm not Ultor, but just as an example of it being less open than the OGL, if Mongoose had released MRQI under a similar license to the HeroQuest Gateway license then you wouldn't have been able to produce anything like your OpenQuest.

 

[Fonso]

I don't think that make a new ruleset and divide more the market would be a good idea.

I think the market will rule on that question.

I would rather not have to buy another ruleset more, especially if it's very similar to MRQ2.

Then don't buy it; you won't be forced to.

While I don't think I *need* another set of RQ rules, I'd be lying if I said I won't take a look at RQ6. I have a high regard for the authors' work.

I'm sorry if my words were harder that I though. English is not my language and I must fight it to say that I'm thinking. :?

I was thinking something similar to that.... When you have a limited money to spend, buy another book with minimal changes is a bad idea. Great changes? Then could be...
If they are not planning a big change of rules, everything they do to allow an easy conversion between rulesets will increase their customers.

 

[Newtus]

I hope the RQ6 license learns from the Heroquest Gateway license and makes it a bit more open.

Just out of interest how could the HQ Gateway in your opinion made any better by making it a bit more open. Not being snarky here just intrigued?

I'm not Ultor, but just as an example of it being less open than the OGL, if Mongoose had released MRQI under a similar license to the HeroQuest Gateway license then you wouldn't have been able to produce anything like your OpenQuest.

Yup I can figure that one out

Bear in mind that I already have a full commercial product out and have a 'fan' site under the HQ Gateway license.

What opportunities as a publisher and fan am I missing because I have to use the HQ Gateway license instead of an OGL?

 

[danskmacabre]

There's no way I'm buying yet another version of RQ. Legend doesn't count as it's supposed to be the sam as MRQ2 without the name due to licensing issues.
But now RQ6, *groan* talk about fragmentation of a market.

Anyway whatever, I have enough of the MRQ2 books to be happy running RQ RPGs for a long time and I'm not buying into any more versions of RQ for a very long time.

It'd be great it just goes SRD like Pathfinder, I find running that game (that I own all the rules books for, so they got my money) so much easier, as I can refer to ALL the rules online as well no matter where I am.

 

[DamonJynx]

There's no way I'm buying yet another version of RQ. Legend doesn't count as it's supposed to be the sam as MRQ2 without the name due to licensing issues.
But now RQ6, *groan* talk about fragmentation of a market.

Anyway whatever, I have enough of the MRQ2 books to be happy running RQ RPGs for a long time and I'm not buying into any more versions of RQ for a very long time.

Agree wholeheartedly.

It'd be great it just goes SRD like Pathfinder, I find running that game (that I own all the rules books for, so they got my money) so much easier, as I can refer to ALL the rules online as well no matter where I am.

Wishful thinking I'm afraid. But it would be nice.

 

[Redcrow]

I like the MRQ2 system overall. It has some Glorantha specific flavor to it that I don't care for, but that has been easy enough to strip out and discard. Hopefully Legend will clean all that out and present something a little more generic.

I am kind of surprised that RQ6 is going to have a new set of rules, though. Seems to me it would be easier just to take Legend and tack on everything Glorantha specific in a setting book like Deus Vult, Wraith Recon, etc. But that would probably only be possible if Legend were OGL and this announcement seems to imply it won't be.

MRQ2/Legend has given me enough to keep me gaming for quite awhile so I'm good. I've even been considering running a Viking campaign recently and that alone will probably keep me busy for a year or two.

 

[medievaladventures]

What opportunities as a publisher and fan am I missing because I have to use the HQ Gateway license instead of an OGL?

The ability to present alternative rules (for e.g. removing hit locations and using general hit points) would be prohibited by the Gateway license, the ability to rework the game into something new (e.g. OpenQuest), and possibly the ability to combine OGL material from other game systems into the setting/adventure/game that you're publishing. It doesn't seem like using the Gateway license provides much aside from the use of the logo that couldn't be done with fair use and nominal use under copyright and trademark law. But since you've published under both licenses, I'm sure you're aware of all these things.

 

[Philotomy]

I'm sorry if my words were harder that I though. English is not my language and I must fight it to say that I'm thinking.

No worries. Looking back at my post, I see it could read harsher than I intended. And I think your English is excellent.

 

[walkerd]

Over the last few months I have purchased all the RQII available from rpg drive thru and I doubt I will be buying core rule books from anyone. What I want would be supplements and background material, regardless of who produces it.

If both systems are going to be not only simiar to each other but will be similar to RQII I am not sure if there will a lot of sales of the base rules. Of course I could be wrong.

 

[DamonJynx]

If both systems are going to be not only simiar to each other but will be similar to RQII I am not sure if there will a lot of sales of the base rules. Of course I could be wrong.

Depends on how they market it. They may be able to get it to wider audience than before. But I seriously doubt it. There would have to be significant changes/improvements for me to re-invest in the core rules. Like everyone else, I only have a set amount to spend on RPG stuff and there's no point in buying redundant stuff, e.g. if the books adds 100 pages of content why should I pay again for the 200 I've already got? Loz and Pete are both, from my experience anyway, good guys and always willing to help, but financial realities are just that...

Nice to see another Sydneysider on the boards!

 

[Newtus]

The ability to present alternative rules (for e.g. removing hit locations and using general hit points) would be prohibited by the Gateway license,

Nope, you can do this with HQ Gateway. I'm currently working on a commerical product that does just this, and I've run it past Jeff Richard of Moon Design and he's said yes.

the ability to rework the game into something new (e.g. OpenQuest), and possibly the ability to combine OGL material from other game systems into the setting/adventure/game that you're publishing.

Again you can include OGL and Creative Commons material along side material you write under the HQ Gateway liscence. I nearly did this for Ye HeroQuest Book of Fantasy and in the end I didn't purely because that part of the project got dropped.

It doesn't seem like using the Gateway license provides much aside from the use of the logo that couldn't be done with fair use and nominal use under copyright and trademark law. But since you've published under both licenses, I'm sure you're aware of all these things.

The only thing, and this is what seems to be getting people's back up, is that you can't produce a self contained game or stick up the complete rules in SRD form on the internet . That's it period. All other options for both fan and commerical use are covered. This is because Moon Design want to make money out of selling the core rules

Oh yes and another sticking point with some people, is yes there is an approval process because Moon Design doesn't want people publishing offensive content, and we are talking FATAL levels of offensive here, using thier game system.

But apart from this its a very generous license that allows you to freely publish stuff and if you are doing commercial products without having to pay a fee.

 

[Vile]

If both systems are going to be not only simiar to each other but will be similar to RQII I am not sure if there will a lot of sales of the base rules. Of course I could be wrong.

As MRQ2 will no longer be published by then, why wouldn't there be sales of the RQ6 core rules? It may be competing with Legend (and BRP) as a "D100" rule set, but if people are out to buy a "RuneQuest" rulebook, why wouldn't they buy RQ6? After all, it will be the only RuneQuest rulebook in print.

I think too many people are looking at this from their personal viewpoint. Of course you wouldn't buy a book which is very similar to something you already own*. But sales depend on new customers far more than old ones.

*Well, maybe you would. Most gamers have, at some stage.

 

[danskmacabre]

So Runequest 6, is this replacing BRP or is is Runequest 5 some other iteration of RQ?

It's all so very confusing, so many different version of Runequest out there.
Open quest
MRQ2/Legend (MRQ1 a few years before that)
BRP, it looks like this is it's own version of Runequest.
So Runequest 5, now to soon become Runequest 6.

Probably other versions out there I'd imagine.

There was a a time when there was just Runequest and sure it came out with new versions every now and then, but still one supported set of rules.

I think the whole Runequest thing is very confusing and I quite like the RQ system in general.
It must be very difficult for new people to the system to figure out what to get and what suits them.
And frustrating with new versions of various iterations coming out, changing names.
I'd imagine this must be scaring people off.

Anyway good luck to those working on RQ6, I hope it works out for you.

 

[Vile]

RQ6 refers to the 6th edition of RQ that has been published. It's not really that confusing (if you ignore the strange decision to name the 2nd Mongoose edition "RuneQuest II"):

1e: RQ1 (Chaosium)
2e: RQ2 (Chaosium)
3e: RQ3 (Avalon Hill)
4e: MRQ1 (Mongoose)
5e: MRQ2 (Mongoose)
6e: RQ6 (Design Mechanism)

I know lots of people have piped up with "RQIV/RuneQuest Adventures" which floats around the web as a playtest draft, but that was never published so it's not included.